BS: Water Bills

Subject: BS: Water Bills
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 07 Aug 09 - 06:07 PM

What do you pay a year?



In the UK, we pay different amounts for our water, depending on where we live.

Down here in the West Country, we pay the *highest* rates *in* the country, nearly £800 a year. When talking to my friend the other day, she told me that up in the affluent South East, she pays just over £400 a year.

So, how does that work then?

Down here in the South West, we have some of the lowest paid jobs, yet we have to pay more for our water than anywhere else....often because of the tourist industry, clean beaches, health & safety etc...but surely, that's deeply unfair?

WHY do those on low wages, have to sub those who can afford lovely holidays, because they have enough left over from their salary to afford a West Country cottage holiday, whilst down here people have to go out to clean those cottages, so they can afford to pay their water bills?

Puzzled Smiley!

Surely we should pay the same for our water, no matter where we live in the UK, shouldn't we?

Yes, I know we have different water companies, but that's irrelevant. Water is a vital source to us all, but why are some paying more than others....and paying VASTLY more than others too.

And as for water meters!   

Yes, if you live alone, or with just one other person, you probably do save money each month, but if you have a family your bill can rocket in price...especially if you live down here in Devon or Cornwall....

You can ONLY get help with your water bills if you have a medical condition requiring substantial amounts of extra water use AND you are on benefits as well...OR....if you have 3 children under 19 AND you are, again, on benefits as well.

If you have a medical condition but no benefits, even if you are literally just above the poverty line, you have to pay a small fortune for your metered West Country Water...

Is that fair?

Nope..it's Shite...which will of course require vast amounts of water to remove.

And did you know that once the water companies have put a water meter in, you can NEVER have it removed?

I've written to OFWAT
..not only because I wanted to, but also because the young lady from South West Water practically *begged* me to, as guess what, she can barely afford her water bills....and she gets so many people phoning her about it, getting terribly upset...

No way should people be living in misery in this country through not being able to afford to pay their water bills!...Gee, the stress that so many people are under over this! And I bet those at the top have huge bonuses every year, along with their huge salaries...

Something is very, very wrong!

I had a conversation with one chap from their customer care department the other day, quite young, and he was telling me that his Dad had an 'ordinary' job, and on his salary alone he managed to raise two children, have holidays, run a little car and pay his mortgage. Now his son HAS to have his wife working as well, because they cannot afford to live on just one salary alone anymore. Even with both of them working, they're working almost entirely to pay the bills, leaving them very little for 'life'...

That's not right.

That is SO not right that it stinks!   And I'd bring in the hose to wash away the smell, but.....it would cost me too much.

Once we died from infected water, but that water was free.

Now, we die from infected bills, bills that get into our souls and sap our strength, whilst the Corporate Bastards try to convince us how grateful we should be for their wonderful services...

But tell me, WHAT is the point in all this wondrously blue flag passed, sparkling beautiful water, if people are getting sick through not flushing their toilets, or keeping themselves clean properly.....or our Gardens of England are disappearing under tons of gravel, because no-one can afford to water their lawns any longer...?

Water, water everywhere, but can't afford a drop to drink!

Welcome, to Cool Britannia, Land of 'Cutthroats, Crooks and Conmen'


And I'm sorry, but why the f**k isn't that song of Steve Knightley's EVERYWHERE!

VIVA LA REVOLUCION!

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Peace
Date: 07 Aug 09 - 06:13 PM

Here it's included in property tax. The only time I recall paying for water it was $50/month because water was trucked in twice weekly (300 gallons each time) and sewage was trucked out twice weekly(different truck). The payment was to cover the cost of hiring a truck driver and truck. Not bad, imo. However, there's no payment per se in towns or cities--that I'm aware of.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 07 Aug 09 - 06:19 PM

I have been thinking about water costs myself recently so this thread is of interest to me.

I'm in Yorkshire and we're paying £32 a month for water for two of us and that is on a meter. One of my sons lives alone and that property does not have a meter and he pays £27.50 a month water rates. I did wonder if he should be getting a meter installed.

What you are paying is extortionate. I can understand that the water companies have costs to clean the water etc. but since it is a basic requirement for life it shouldn't cost more depending on where you live.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 07 Aug 09 - 06:30 PM

Forgot to say that the £32 is for 12 months but the £27.50 is only for 10 months of the year.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: gnu
Date: 07 Aug 09 - 07:11 PM

Well, here in Moncton, NB, we got screwed by the rich politicians and their friends who supply water meters. Mega $ made.

Water meters for residential housing are a scam, plain and simple. The justification is water conservation. But, if the computer that calculates the bill can calculate the bill, why would there be no notification of a spike in use... obviously indicating a leak?

If the idea is conservation, why charge peeps such a cheap rate? Oh, yeah... some peeps can't afford a big water bill. BUT?... those that can don't give a crap and wash their big shiney SUV gas guzzlers and say, "Sod off. I am paying for it."

Fact is, when water MUST be conserved during dry spells, public announcements in the media will suffice and they are FREE.

Now... here is the kicker... we are on our third round of water meters. Just who do you think can afford to wash their big shiney bank account?

I get so fucking pissed off with thess thiefs.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: gnu
Date: 07 Aug 09 - 07:21 PM

You correct the typos... I am too upset.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: artbrooks
Date: 08 Aug 09 - 07:42 PM

My water bill is about $75US per month - I guess that's about £45.    Living in the American Southwest, water is a matter of constant concern. Builders are required to prove that there is a sufficient sustainable water supply to allow for any additional housing units before construction is permitted. This water either comes from deep artesian wells or from about 500 miles north of here, in the Colorado Rockies, and is purified both before and after use. Water use is carefully controlled: lawn watering every day or after 10:00 am is forbidden, as is using a hose to wash a car.   Drought is normal.

So the question I'd have for a person complaining about the high cost of water is...do you know what it actually costs your municipality or water authority to deliver it to your tap? Does the price you pay represent a profit or a loss? Is potable water essentially unlimited where you live?

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: gnomad
Date: 08 Aug 09 - 08:18 PM

If you are metered, and the meter is not faulty, your bill is controllable by you. Should your local suppliers attempt a manifestly unfair price they should experience a mass revolt. But...

If you live in an area where water is scarce, or where sewerage or other environmental charges are necessarily higher, your bill per gallon is going to be higher; the unit cost of supplying water is not dependent on the wage level of its consumers.

A meter works for me. In Yorkshire, single person, no garden to water, no car washing fetish, but still careful how I use ALL resources, £10 a month leaves me slightly in credit. When I could not choose to be metered it made me furious to see the cavalier attitude to water waste exhibited by many neighbours, where a group of careless users paid the same as one careful user if they happened to occupy a similar property.

Water is a precious resource. Clean water in adequate quantities for health should be available and affordable to all the world's people, preferably by a tap in the home, rather than a long walk with a heavy load. Beyond that requirement I see no reason why a reasonable commercial price should not apply.

If your area has lots of sunshine (something that many of us would envy a good deal) it is likely that water is in short supply: if not, then not. Once the mechanics of swapping rain for sunshine can be sorted out then fair shares of all can be arranged. Until then the answer may lie in thinking before consuming.*

*This applies to all finite resources, water, fuel of any kind, food, etc, and the thought needs to be not a question of "Can I afford it?", but of "Can the world afford it?"

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Sandra in Sydney
Date: 09 Aug 09 - 01:44 AM

Sydney Water - supplies more than 1.4 billion litres of water to more than 1.7 million homes and businesses each day. Sydney Water policy on assistance to those who need help paying their bills, & tips for saving water

Most properties have individual meters, except for some older apartment blocks which have only 1 meter. I pay around $120 per quarter, one 20th of the total on our building's meter. 5 of our apartments have 2 bedrooms, & some occupants have partners/families so it's not a completely "fair" system, but it works ok.

Australia is the land of droughts & flooding rains and many parts of Australia are Drought Declared (definition) at different times, depending on weather & water conditions, and consequently have water restrictions.

Sydney Water had recently relaxed its Water Restrictions as our dam levels have risen after good rains.

Some folks in remoter areas rely permanently on water tanks, as Joybell does (she's had 13 years of drought in her area), and many city folks also install tanks to catch rainwater. Some areas rely on trucked-in water when local water is low.

sandra

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Peace
Date: 09 Aug 09 - 01:50 AM

"Toilets are the enemy

Each day, the U.S. uses 5.8 billion gallons of fresh water to flush waste. If you're in the market for a new porcelain throne, check out options with either a very low (less than 1.6) gallon per flush (gpf) rating, or dual flush controls.

This new technology provides 2 buttons for flushing: one at 1.6 gpf for solid waste, and another at only 0.8 gpf for liquids. These double-duty flushers can reduce water usage by up to 67 percent compared with traditional toilets."

From the www.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Leadfingers
Date: 09 Aug 09 - 09:57 AM

The Privatisation of 'Public Utilities' is a Crime Against Humanity !
Water , Electricity , Mains Gas , and Public Transport should NOT be in Private hands at all , but should be Government controlled !
Back in the Bad Old Days , water and sewage were part of your Local Council Rates bill , but after privatisation . its in who ever has bought the local water works hands !

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: gnu
Date: 09 Aug 09 - 04:29 PM

Yes, T. They have been trying to do that here. Electric, water, sewer, roads, schools... is't absolutely disgusting!... beyond belief that these thieves would even try to do it.

gnomad... "If you are metered, and the meter is not faulty, your bill is controllable by you."

True, but not here... the fixed charges are high and the amount paid per cubic metre is paltry, so the water meters are just a way for the politicians and their friends to get richer.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Kent Davis
Date: 09 Aug 09 - 09:04 PM

We have a well, so we pay nothing. There is no chlorine taste or smell, either.

The downside is that, for a few weeks in late summer, we have to be careful not to pump the well dry. For a week or two every year, we can't wash more than one load of clothes daily and we water the animals with buckets hauled from the creek.

Kent

P.S. We have no sewer bill either. The joy of country living!

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Peace
Date: 09 Aug 09 - 09:09 PM

I still know of a few creeks, springs and even lakes from which one may safely drink the untreated water. Going to visit two later in August.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Beer
Date: 09 Aug 09 - 09:20 PM

Yep!, well water also at our place. Had it tested in the spring and all results were good.
Beer (adrien)

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Peace
Date: 09 Aug 09 - 09:25 PM

When I first started teaching we had to travel about 120 km to get potable water. Used to bleach old four-liter plastic milk jugs and fill about 30 of them at a Provincial Park where they left the water running all year round. The stuff from the teacherage well was much filled with calcium carbonate and sodium carbonate. I have always preferred water that ain't got additives. Getting harder to find.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Beer
Date: 09 Aug 09 - 10:27 PM

How true Bruce. How true.
ad.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Beer
Date: 09 Aug 09 - 11:03 PM

Sorry Lizzie for taken the thread to a not so supportive light. Your concerns are very real and I'm sure happy that I am not living in that situation. I hope that you can get some great advise here on Mudcat and else where.
Adrien

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: open mike
Date: 10 Aug 09 - 12:56 AM

peace, glad to hear they used different trucks!for pre and post use H20

there is soon going to be a plumbing code that includes grey water use for watering plants...i have a book called making an oasis with grey water..that is water that has been used to wash clothes, dishes, and bodies. I recently got a device that uses clean water that goes into the toilet tank to wash your hands. the more ways you can learn to use water twice, the further it will go.

http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2007/09/homemade_toilet_tank_sink.html
http://www.oasisdesign.net/greywater/   Art Ludwig is the guru of this
water use and re-use information.

here is another invention for saving and re-using water.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Peace
Date: 10 Aug 09 - 01:12 AM

I think that other than a few times being thirsty and not having access to clean water, the wait for the purification tablets to neutralize/kill the bacteria seemed a long time. Other than that I never really did know that water was such a problem in some parts of the world. The Dune series of sci-fi books gave food for thought, and living with trucked in/trucked out water for more than a few years--well, I'm convinced. I recall a story that was in the established press (I think before news was on the computer) about a fellow who used Lake Ontario water straight from the lake and was able to develop a few 35 mm pictures. I don't know enough about film development despite having done the three-step process a few times with black and white.

The desertification of places on the planet is scary. Some statements I have no reason to disbelieve follow;

"Each year, the planet loses 24 billion tons of topsoil. Over the last two decades, enough has been lost to cover the entire cropland of the United States.

Desertification is especially severe in Africa, where two-thirds of the continent is desert or drylands, and where 73 per cent of its agricultural drylands are already seriously or moderately degraded.

Asia contains the largest amount of land affected by desertification of any continent-just under 1,400 million hectares.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Peace
Date: 10 Aug 09 - 01:30 AM

I actually used grey water about twenty years back. Was living in a dryland agro area and due to the well situation during dry times--which was most times--when the kids had baths (same water for both unless they'd got really dirty) I'd siphon the bath water out the window to the garden. It's important not to get chemicals in the garden system although some soaps are good in terms of aphids. The toughest thing I think will be for people to get caught in the crunch now and then to bring back the reality of just not having. I have been making an affort to be 'green'. (I figure I can get four days outta one pair of FotLs. Outside out, inside out, back to front, front to back.) But that stuff aside, we've made such a goddamned mess of the planet that I fear it won't recover. Or recovery will be hindered by weather (I don't know squat about climate change. I'm fairly fundamental when it comes to that. I call it weather. That I do know something about.) I use the rock method which I first heard about from a young fellow who had a great sense of humour. He was in Grade 7 at the time and straight-faced he told me about it. He told me 'his people' (Cree) tied a rock to a strip of moose hide and hung it outside their front door where the weather could get at it. When the rock was warm the sun was shining. When the rock was white it was snowing, When it was wet it was raining . . . .

Anyway, I've babbled enough for now. Keep up the good work, OM.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Aug 09 - 03:57 AM

Here in Lower Stoke (north Kent), nearly surrounded by the waters of the Thames and Medway (not to mention the North Sea) my water rates are £450.47 per year. I am not a tremendously heavy user - shower in stead of baths for example - but I do water my tree brugmansiae (daturas) and hanging baskets. Oh, and (besetting sin) use a dishwasher daily. And do separate clothes washes for whites/lights/darks.

My late mother had a water meter, and being one litle old lady in a bungalow doing no gardening, not using a dishwasher and needing to run the washing machine only weekly, it was very cheap - until there was a fault (never did find out if it was in the meter or a pipe, or dripping taps) and suddenly her alleged usage rocketed. I had quite a row with the water company. They simply could not understand from a simple spreadsheet display that the usage rates were wildly out of kilter.

I see no obvious reason why water should cost more in the wet South West than here in the east. But the privatisation of water in the UK has led to a system where consumers cannot choose their suppliers, the suppliers are governed by the profit motive, and a quango has to control price rises. How can that be sense?

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Will Fly
Date: 10 Aug 09 - 04:13 AM

Lizzie, you're quite right - water prices per unit of measurement should be the same wherever you are in this country, and the cost of a gallon here in Sussex should be the same as the cost of a gallon in Devon or Kent. If the water is then metered accurately, it's up to us to be as clean and poor - or as rich and dirty - as we wish to be. :-)

As far as using the lavatory is concerned, we have a rule in our house which stops over-flushing: If it's yellow, let it mellow - it it's brown, flush it down! We've just had a new loo put in downstairs, and it uses a small proportion of water compared with the previous one, and it's quieter.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 10 Aug 09 - 05:10 AM

Here in Essex the rates were about £380 per year. We've had a water meter put in and we're financially better off. Whent he extension is finished the down stairs toilet will be flushed with a grey water system.

Mum and Dad live the Scottish Highlands and their water rates are included in their council tax which is about £130 per month for 10 months. Our council tax here is £134 per month not including water.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Kent Davis
Date: 10 Aug 09 - 07:56 PM

As an American, I'm having a hard time understanding why water should cost the same throughout the U.K. I realize the country is very much smaller than the U.S., but it is not smaller than most U.S. states.

Here we have variations in average rainfall, in elevation, in the roughness of the topography, in type of subsoil through which pipes must pass, in depth of the water table, in the amount and type of dissolved minerals in subsurface water, in the amount of pollution in surface water, in the depth to which pipes must be buried to prevent freezing, in the condition of the existing water-related infrastructure, in industrial demand, in agricultural demand, in population density, in the rate of population growth, in the cost of electricity to pump the water, and in the extent to which cisterns, wells, and springs can serve as competition for municipal water supplies. All those things affect American water rates.

How is it different there?

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: open mike
Date: 10 Aug 09 - 08:23 PM

what's a council tax?

water may be the thing that causes the most conflict
in the world as we continue to increase our population
and put more pressure on the resource.

water rights may be more important that oil to the world

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Peace
Date: 10 Aug 09 - 08:39 PM

Yeah. And this country is sitting on about 22% of the world's fresh water.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 11 Aug 09 - 08:37 AM

Council tax is something we all hate paying but have no choice in the matter! It's calulated on the value of your house (whether you rent it or own it) and the money goes towards services such as rubbish collection...and in most of London there is a portion that goes towards the olympics.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Will Fly
Date: 11 Aug 09 - 03:30 PM

As an American, I'm having a hard time understanding why water should cost the same throughout the U.K.

Water is different from all other commodities in one essential aspect: it is absolutely necessary for life. Our access to water, or our ability to have water, should not be subject to the whims of the market, or profit or geography. A look at the huge importance that water plays in what is sometimes called the Third world demonstrates this.

Of course water companies have to run efficiently and pay their way, but   no one part of the UK should pay comparatively extortionate prices by comparison with any other at the whim of the local company. Water is a vital force, not just another market commodity.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Penny S.
Date: 11 Aug 09 - 03:46 PM

At the time that Mrs Thatcher instigated the privatisation of the water companies, an acquaintance of a friend, who had had a managerial post in a water utility, was taken away on a training weekend. He was told how he was to dress, what sort of car he should drive, where he should live, in order for him to be paid the much inflated rewards for management in a private company. If he failed to live up to the corporate code, he could expect to lose his job, regardless of the years of knowledge of the business he had in his brain.

Recently, the flats where I live lost our water supply. it turned out to be briefly, but before that was clear, I called out a private company to help, in case there was a leak on our pipe, as the local company insisted it must be (though they knew that there was work going on up the road - a great distance away - all of 250 yards). It cost us a lot of money to be told that the engineers up the road had not flushed the pipe, and debris and air was forced into ours, but engineers who had found it impossible to go on working for their own company because of its loss of service ethic. The same attitude was found in the company engineer who came to sort out the thing I call a stopcock, but they call an outside stop valve (OSV), but couldn't.

The next guy who came to the logged job wasn't equipped in van or mind to do the work, and clearly lacked the training, experience, or the benefit of working with a more experienced engineer before he was sent out alone.

The companies now work for their shareholders and directors. They do put work into improving pipes and sewers, but not always up to standard. Since they put in a new main, cheaply, up our road, there have been a string of leaks at each property in turn.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: artbrooks
Date: 11 Aug 09 - 07:26 PM

"water should not be subject to the whims of the market, or profit or geography"

Water, albeit necessary to life, is a commodity. It may or may not be free at the source, but it costs to purify, store, deliver and to purify again before it is returned to the aquifer. Whether these expenses are incurred by a governmental entity or by a private company, they are still expenses. It is simple to advocate for uniform pricing, but not easy to do without someone being harmed.   
Ms. Cornish says that she pays £800 per year for water, while a friend in a different region pays £400. Mr Bridge pays £450. Eanjay's son pays £330. All four apparently get unlimited water for those amounts.   It's unlikely that the large difference in Ms. Cornish's water cost represents pure profit to her supplier (although it is certainly possible), so I'd assume that the difference in these four bills indicates a real difference in the costs of providing water.

Assume, just for the sake of discussion, that these four amounts actually represent the range in water supply costs, and average them out (this is almost certainly an invalid way of figuring mean water costs).   I get a figure of £495. Subtract 10%, to allow for exorbitant corporate profits, and I get £445. Again for the sake of discussion, let's set this as the "fair" national cost for water, with some sort of national entity taxing every household evenly at that rate.   Ms. Cornish gets a great deal, Mr. Bridge stays about the same, and Ms. Cornish's friend and eanjay's son have significant rate increases. Sounds fair, right? I'd say that would depend on the side of the equation where you end up.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Aug 09 - 07:56 PM

FFS! Water is a national asset. It is one of the purposes of government to provide infrastructure - including water extraction, purification and distribution. The idea of it being a profit-making commodity is a pure perversion. The privatisation by Thatcher of water was moronic.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Kent Davis
Date: 11 Aug 09 - 07:58 PM

Thanks for answering , Will Fly. It is interesting how differently people think.

I consider food absolutely necessary for life, yet never thought that everyone thoughout my country should pay the same for food. I consider warmth absolutely necessary for life (in our climate), yet never thought that everyone's heating bill should be the same, or even that the unit cost of heating should be the same, with no difference from Maine to Miami. I consider shelter to be absolutely necessary for life (again, in this climate), but never thought that the cost of a house here in Appalachia should be the same as the cost of a house in San Francisco or New York City. Everyone needs some space. If the price per acre of land were the same throughout the U.S.A., no one could afford to sell land in the cities and no one could afford to buy land in the country.

How is it there? Is it only water that should cost the same throughout the country, or should everything else cost the same too?

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Penny S.
Date: 12 Aug 09 - 05:19 AM

One of the problems with the South West is that in summer, the population swells with emmets, all producing sewage. In some places the effluent used to run into the sea from pipes discharging close to beaches. There has been a tremendous amount of work to clean it up. But there aren't the locals paying the company to equal the needs of the upkeep of the system, and they aren't among the best paid of the nation.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: semi-submersible
Date: 12 Aug 09 - 08:28 AM

Mr. Brooks, water is not a commodity, it is common property. It is vital to all life. It is not manufactured for sale, it is provided by our environment, but in limited supply. Conservation and sustainable distribution when scarcity is present make sense.   Reserving the supply for those who can pay, does not.

A minimal supply of usable water, accessible to all citizens, is a public health service and the cost of its delivery should be funded as such. (Food growing must be allowed a certain amount of water on the same basis, and regions may also support local industries by allotting them a portion of water. Above a basic quantity per user of water, market pricing could be fairly applied, as long as license for such use remains a privilege, not a right to water, and the water supply always remains in the public domain.)

Kent, private land is not essential in the way that water is. Many communities try to supply basic amounts of food to those without means to grow or buy it. Supplying water is technically more difficult (e.g. it's usually easier to supply unlimited quantities through a pipe than share it out) but all the more vital.

If we could agree on the thresholds separating scarcity from abundance, we could in theory sustain any amount of exploitation of any public resource while surplus is available. However, that creates a temptation to believe, "There is a surplus," as long as possible. As Canada's cod fishery debacle demonstrates, humans with the best will in the world, and all the research in the world, are still embedded in a psychological and political environment which will systemically select for research, results, conclusions, and personnel which favour near-term benefit and externalise costs. Even the smallest pull, if sustained, will change the course of the largest ship; so, even the tiniest bias will gradually change the behaviour of the whole system if far-sighted decision making (e.g. conservation) is rewarded less than short-term thinking (e.g. profit now).

Is there any place on earth where limited water supplies are shared equitably among humans without sacrificing the local ecology's health?

Peace, if those Ice Age meltwater pools we call the Great Lakes contain 22% of Earth's fresh surface water, that doesn't mean we have a fifth of the freshwater supply. Only 2% of that water comes from yearly precipitation. The rest of it is non-renewable: draw down the water table too fast and it won't come back. (Remember the Aral Sea?)

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Aug 09 - 09:15 AM

Other infrastructure items properly include electricity, gas, roads, telephones, a postal service, general policing, a justice and public order system, central banking, and a welfare state.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Aug 09 - 09:24 AM

I wouldn't care as much if we owned the water we paid for but we don't - We only rent it! And the bastards charge us to put it back into the system as well!

On the subject of meters - don't fall for the line that you only pay for what you use. Don't forget that they will apply a standing charge just for having the meter. In my case, when I had a flat in Whitley Bay, I hardly used any as I was only in the flat 4 nights a week but I still paid £30 a month for the privelege:-(

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: john f weldon
Date: 12 Aug 09 - 09:25 AM

A lovely song from Lake of Stew, possibly slightly off-topic:

(3rd song down)

water bill

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Penny S.
Date: 12 Aug 09 - 10:00 AM

To enlarge on DeG's comment, since privatisation, the companies own the water that falls on our property. We cannot simply collect it and use it, apparently. (Not sure about water butts, which we are advised to have.) If it runs into the drains system, we have to pay to have it removed. If it goes into a soakaway, we don't. My ex-brother-in-law had a warehouse, and his rainwater ran into a nearby stream - he had to pay for that.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Kent Davis
Date: 12 Aug 09 - 10:02 PM

Penny S.,

Are you saying that, in the U.K., private companies own the RAIN that falls on YOUR land? Surely not! We would never stand for that in the U.S.!

Kent

P.S. to Semi-submersible,

One difference between the U.S.-Canadian Great Lakes and the Aral Sea is that the Great Lakes are continually being renewed. We are not drawing out anywhere near enough water to dry them up the way the Aral Sea has been (nearly) dried up.

Here's a little picture of the water left over after Duluth, Thunder Bay, Milwaukee, Chicago, Gary, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Erie, and Buffalo take the water they need: http://www.empire.state.ny.us/nyviews/greaterniagara/pages/Niagara%20Falls2.htm

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Will Fly
Date: 13 Aug 09 - 04:00 AM

Kent:
I consider food absolutely necessary for life, yet never thought that everyone thoughout my country should pay the same for food.

I would say, with respect, that we can make choices about the food that we eat and the clothes that we wear, and how we shelter ourselves, depending on inclination, circumstances, opportunities, etc. I believe, however, that water stands apart from this and should be dealt withe differently at the infrastructural level. In a comparatively small country like the UK, the collection, treatment and distribution of water should not be yet another opportunity for profit making (which it certainly is) and subject to enormous differences in price.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: GUEST,Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 13 Aug 09 - 08:42 AM

We have water from our borehole and drainage is to a soakaway so our costs are for routine maintenance and the electricity for the pump, but it still comes close to the local mains charge because of the amount of treatment needed.

We have no limit to how much we use though!

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: G-Force
Date: 13 Aug 09 - 08:51 AM

OK, so how much water do you use?   Our metered usage works out at 155 litres per day over the last 6 months, this is for a family of 2 people. Apparently this is way below average. Which makes me glad we're on a meter, why should we pay the same as the above-average users?

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Penny S.
Date: 13 Aug 09 - 02:47 PM

Kent, I wrote what I have been given to understand - it was under Thatcher, who brought a lot of stuff in which people did not understand at the time.

The water utilities, once companies, now companies again, have always owned the aquifers. If you want to extract from a borehole, or an old well, you need a licence. In the 60's my science tutor at college had a tiny rivulet crossing his garden. He wanted to build a pond, and had to have permission for that. Fair enough, if he was going to prevent water from reaching others downstream. (There were awful problems in the Middle Ages when mill-owners stopped water from reaching other mill-ponds downstream, saw the laws went back a long way.)

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Penny S.
Date: 13 Aug 09 - 03:35 PM

This is a link to a government curriculum site, which raises the question of ownership, but curiously does not include information to answer the question.

Interesting omission


Strangely, though I googled for UK results, a lot of US sites showed up which suggested that collecting the rainwater on the roofs of Denver and Phoenix and Utah is illegal. Also Colorado. You'd better check your situation, Kent.

The only more general answers came from David Icke's site, which I do not trust as a source.

I also discovered a newspaper report from a couple of years ago about an intention to charge by area for rainwater removal - this applied to sports fields as well as village halls, and often to places where the water would go down into the aquifers. It was not a small charge. I can't remember how this story ended, but it was set to close down scout troops and football clubs, and drain money from schools.

The water companies do advocate rainwater harvesting. I've not been able to confirm ownership in the UK. Scotland has somehow still got something more public, possibly a mutual company.

There is something about the WTO being against the renationalising of companies. I didn't realise that Thames, with whom I am in dispute, also owns Sydney - a bit of a stretch of the catchment!

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Kent Davis
Date: 13 Aug 09 - 10:22 PM

Penny S,

You are correct that the water laws in the desert West are much more restrictive that in the rest of the country. Even there, though, the rain falling on a person's property does not belong to a private company. Collecting rainwater is not illegal, according to this state of Utah site http://www.waterrights.utah.gov/wrinfo/faq.asp#q1 . However, it is illegal to, for example, take water that the people downstream have the right to expect. For example, a ranch upstream can't hog all the water, leaving none for a downstream ranch.

In the U.S., the water companies do not (normally) own the aquifers. They might, of course, buy water rights from someone, but they do not "automatically" own the water.

In our area, we have multiple options for water. We can buy water from the local utility. We can drill our own well. We can collect rainwater. We can buy water from a water hauler (about $60 for 2,000 gallons) who will deliver the water in a truck (lorry, I think you would call it) and pump it into our cistern. If I had a pick-up truck, I could get a truckbed tank and haul the water myself from whichever water company has the best price. We could, I suppose, get our water from a spring, but our springs are too small for that to be practical. I can buy drinking water in 5 gallon containers (too expensive for most uses but good if the well is low). I can also haul water from a creek (for the animals to drink and to flush the toilets). I suppose the competition probably helps keep prices down. In this area, the price of municipal water is around $2 to $4 per 1,000 gallons.

One option we don't have in the U.S., as far as I know, is unmetered municipal water. I had never heard of such a thing until I read this thread. It seems like that would encourage waste.

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: GUEST,Black Belt Caterpillar Wrestler
Date: 14 Aug 09 - 07:56 AM

There's no way that I could ever use all the rain water that falls on my land!
If I could collect it I would need more than an Olympic swimming pool just for summer showers!
Also it's on a slope so most of it would soon be next door downhill anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Penny S.
Date: 15 Aug 09 - 07:21 AM

Kent, I suspect that the rainwater thing - still haven't found an answer - is a special version of the not preventing water from reaching someone who has a right to expect it downstream. Also that the aquifer ownership was sorted out at some time in the history of the setting up of water companies, nationalising them, and then reprivatising them. We've recently had a small aquifer accessed for the first time round here, and there wasn't any fuss about who owned it. Not enough about where the pipes ran, either. The companies seem to have inherited rights which were appropriate for a socially owned entity, but not for a private company. Whatever you think about socialism - "I can dig where I want, it's the law," is quite different when you are a part owner of the digging entity from when you are not, and have no powers against them.
When I've finished moving, I just might start researching. It seems interesting. I might just focus on Folkestone in Kent.
It started having a town water supply in Saxon times, when the local Abbess had an aqueduct built from a major spring system at the foot of the hill scarp to the north. This ran until the beginning of the 20th century, when a local water company was set up, using the same springs, and establishing a piped supply from a reservoir. I'm not sure exactly when the aqueduct was broken - I saw it as a child spilling water into a stream it crossed, and its upper reach still carries a small amount. I should imagine that unmetered supply would be a compensation for not being able to get the free supply from the aqueduct, I'm sure the engineers of the time would have been up to meters. Of course, back then, people would not have been using as much as now. They would have paid at a rate (it was called water rates) based on the size of the property, which would have a link to usage. Folkestone and Dover still have a separate company from the rest of the area, and have been investing a lot of money into stopping using a marine sewage disposal system. (Basically, pump it above highwater, filter it (possibly) and let it flow out about half a mile from shore - similar to Cornwall.)
One of the things farmers do here on the dry east side is to build large reservoirs on their land which they fill in wet periods, and then use to irrigate. I'm not sure what the situation is there - more research needed.
Incidentally, I think if you bought water in from a supplier, the vehicle would either be called a tanker, or possibly a bowser. Bowsers are provided if the water supply is interrupted for any reason, and can be smaller tankers with a tap for people to fill their water bottles from. Or, tankers which sprinkle water on dusty work sites like quarries. Lorries tend to be for solid things. And I'm trying to remember when I last used the word. Vans, pick-up trucks, HGVs, lorries tend to fit in between those in size. Oh yes,
saw some army lorries the other week. Funny thing, language.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Water Bills
From: Penny S.
Date: 15 Aug 09 - 07:33 AM

Story about Severn Trent

Second comment on this blog refers to behaviour of a water comapny claiming ownership.

Penny